Whist I share the anger of Tim Creswell, Steve Pile and others, I think it
would be very foolish to leave the RGS right now.
As critical geographers, many of us would claim to be influenced by
post-colonial theory. If there is one institution that needs to hear the
post-colonial message, then it is surely the (neo) colonial RGS. Are we not
the best group to articulate that message? Would it not be a tragedy to
waste the opportunity that we have before us, to explore the politically
empowering possibilities that postcolonial theory offers, in a context so
close to home?
We should carry on being vocal, critical and disruptive. I suggest we start
by a letter writing campaign offering our thoughts on the vote, saying:
1) We are pleased that such a large number voted in favour of the motion.
2) We are unhappy about the way in which the vote was conducted. In spite
of the involvement of the Electoral Reform Society we did not consider the
ballot to be democratic (why did overseas members not get voting papers?
why was Jellicoe allowed to write a covering letter on institution-headed
paper with the voting papers urging 'fellows' to vote with the
council?..... etc.)
3) We still believe that corporate sponsorship by Shell should be ended.
4) We are not going to shut up. Rather, we are going to campaign for change
on all sorts of issues.
Best wishes,
Alastair Owens
***********************************************
Alastair Owens
Postgraduate Teaching Assistant
Department of Geography
Queen Mary and Westfield College
UNIVERSITY OF LONDON
Mile End Road
London E1 4NS
United Kingdom
Tel: 0171 975 5400 (ext. 4768)
Fax: 0181 981 6276
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
***********************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|